Folding a Set
An interesting hand came up the other day.
Playing 5/10 limit and dealt red pocket queens, and flop comes A :d: K :c: Q :c: . You bet out and get two callers.
Three players see the turn, and the 8 :c: comes on the board.
Fold?
Playing 5/10 limit and dealt red pocket queens, and flop comes A :d: K :c: Q :c: . You bet out and get two callers.
Three players see the turn, and the 8 :c: comes on the board.
Fold?
Comments
Even if someone has the flush, you still have outs to the full house.
Its limit. Bet it out.
I folded and the person in next position had flopped a straight, and last turned a straight flush.
If this was a no limit tourney, I would have played the same. My hand could not have stood a raise.
I don't like your fold because you have a re-draw to the full house and I'm sure you are getting pot odds for it.
I also think you bet it out for two reasons:
1) You still have the best hand a good percentage of the time
2) You have a great draw to a better hand if you are behind.
Sorry, I gapped the fact it was a limit game. Still, I think I would have bet it out as well. Would have gotten burnt I guess, if the community came up the way it did, but still, I believe the odds would still be in my favour most of the time.
In a resent thread, you called 4-bets on the turn with a draw to 8 outs (with at least 6 clean outs) while mildly trash talking your opponents. Here, you have a good chance of having 10 outs, all of which1 would be clean if they are outs, and fold for 2 bets cold back to you.
ScottyZ
1With the omission an opponent continuing past the flop with offsuit pocket 8's.
lol
Also thankfully I can't sing (opera). Yes unfortunately all I had to watch was Hollywood / celebrity poker. wtg, Ming-Na
Derr am I the only one that doesnt see a sf possiblity with that turn card lol?
I am also with the majority here, I think you definetly have to see a river.
As far a my fold on the turn, both players became "alive" after my bet on the turn. I knew I was behind when the betting came back to me. I was a hard fold, but I was happy the way I played it.
Scotty, on my last thread, I knew I was behind and took the chance to draw for the best hand available. This flop in this case was very well coordinated and the turn did nothing to help it. I recent the idea that you may be a shot at me :-)
The pot was one raise preflop and one bet on the flop.
So about 3 BBs after the flop betting? Then you lead, raise, reraise means you're getting around 4.5 to 1 on calling two. If you figure a full house is good (and I imagine it will be more than 90% of the time), you've got 10 outs which is good enough odds to see the river. It's not a huge margin, though, so folding isn't horribly wrong, just maybe a bit on the conservative side. It's the guy who flopped the straight with no flush draw who really misplayed this hand - he should've raised the flop to discourage flush draws. Wouldn't have helped in this case, of course, but as a general concept slowplaying a straight on this board is not a good idea.
No. The flush draws aren't going anywhere. If Mr flopped straight is going to be punishing anyone, it's the guy with flopped two pair or worse hands. Rarely ever the flush draw.
Implied odds? Mr Straight is going to showdown. If the flush turns on the river but gives the boat, you are winning a capped river. I said it once, I'll say it again, I hate the fold.
This is the right play for the wrong reason. A made straight should raise because it is simply a raise for value in a game where deception is not very important.
Every bet the straight makes which is called by a flush draw sees a long run profit, since the bettor and caller are essentaily making an even money bet where the caller is a 1.8 to 1 dog. This does not necessarily mean that the flush draw is incorrect to call, since there is other money already in the pot.
A lot of people think that you do not want a flush draw to call you in this sort of spot. You sure do want a call.1
ScottyZ
1This is a cash game. In a tournament, you might prefer that your opponent fold in the identical spot.
No I don't. I want a drawing opponent to call a value bet, unless that opponent will complete his draw more than 50% of the time.1
This logic is incorrect.
Let's say that your opponent has a drawing hand that will win 30% of the time. You bet $100 and your opponent calls. This is a profitable bet to have made, since you win $100 70% of the time and lose $100 30% of the time.
It may also be true that calling this bet is profitable for your opponent. For example, this would be the case if the pot size prior to the $100 bet was $2,000.
There is a difference between betting for value and calling. This difference is created by only one thing: the money that is already in the pot.
If you were at a point in a (hypothetical) poker game where there was no money in the pot, the dichotomy of "one person makes a FTP mistake if and only if the other person profits" would cerainly apply. However, when there is some money in the pot, it is possible for every single player in the hand to make a profitable (both literally profitable, and profitable in the sense of FTP) play during a certain betting round.
ScottyZ
1Poker is a complicated game, and I'm over-simplifying a great deal. For example, I'm assuming the play is heads-up to keep the calculations simple. What I really mean is something like "...unless that opponent will win the hand by some means more than 50% of the time."
I think the light bulb that just appeared over my head woke up the hamster who was asleep at the wheel.
Thanks for lifting the fog. Of course I should want my opponent to fold any "correct odds" draw.
ScottyZ